On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 13:37 +0800, Ram Pai wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 10:17:29AM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > Added release_mem_region_adjustable(), which releases a requested
> > region from a currently busy memory resource. This interface
> > adjusts the matched memory resource accordingly if the requested
> > region does not match exactly but still fits into.
> >
> > This new interface is intended for memory hot-delete. During
> > bootup, memory resources are inserted from the boot descriptor
> > table, such as EFI Memory Table and e820. Each memory resource
> > entry usually covers the whole contigous memory range. Memory
> > hot-delete request, on the other hand, may target to a particular
> > range of memory resource, and its size can be much smaller than
> > the whole contiguous memory. Since the existing release interfaces
> > like __release_region() require a requested region to be exactly
> > matched to a resource entry, they do not allow a partial resource
> > to be released.
> >
> > There is no change to the existing interfaces since their restriction
> > is valid for I/O resources.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@xxxxxx>
> > ---
> > include/linux/ioport.h | 2 +
> > kernel/resource.c | 87 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 89 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/ioport.h b/include/linux/ioport.h
> > index 85ac9b9b..0fe1a82 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/ioport.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/ioport.h
> > @@ -192,6 +192,8 @@ extern struct resource * __request_region(struct resource *,
> > extern int __check_region(struct resource *, resource_size_t, resource_size_t);
> > extern void __release_region(struct resource *, resource_size_t,
> > resource_size_t);
> > +extern int release_mem_region_adjustable(struct resource *, resource_size_t,
> > + resource_size_t);
> >
> > static inline int __deprecated check_region(resource_size_t s,
> > resource_size_t n)
> > diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
> > index ae246f9..789f160 100644
> > --- a/kernel/resource.c
> > +++ b/kernel/resource.c
> > @@ -1021,6 +1021,93 @@ void __release_region(struct resource *parent, resource_size_t start,
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(__release_region);
> >
> > +/**
> > + * release_mem_region_adjustable - release a previously reserved memory region
> > + * @parent: parent resource descriptor
> > + * @start: resource start address
> > + * @size: resource region size
> > + *
> > + * The requested region is released from a currently busy memory resource.
> > + * It adjusts the matched busy memory resource accordingly if the requested
> > + * region does not match exactly but still fits into. Existing children of
> > + * the busy memory resource must be immutable in this request.
> > + *
> > + * Note, when the busy memory resource gets split into two entries, the code
> > + * assumes that all children remain in the lower address entry for simplicity.
> > + * Enhance this logic when necessary.
> > + */
> > +int release_mem_region_adjustable(struct resource *parent,
> > + resource_size_t start, resource_size_t size)
> > +{
> > + struct resource **p;
> > + struct resource *res, *new;
> > + resource_size_t end;
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + p = &parent->child;
> > + end = start + size - 1;
> > +
> > + write_lock(&resource_lock);
> > +
> > + while ((res = *p)) {
> > + if (res->start > start || res->end < end) {
>
> This check looks sub-optimal; possbily wrong, to me. if the res->start
> is greater than 'start', then obviously its sibling's start will
> also be greater than 'start'. So it will loop through all the
> resources unnecesarily.
I think this check is necessary to check if the requested range fits
into a resource. It needs to check both sides to verify this. I will
add some comment on this check.
> you might want something like
>
> if (start >= res->end) {
I agree that this list is sorted, so we can optimize an error case (i.e.
no matching entry is found) with an additional check. I will add the
following check at the beginning of the while loop.
if (res->start >= end)
break;
I also realized that the function returns 0 when no matching entry is
found. I will change it to return -EINVAL as well.
>
> > + p = &res->sibling;
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (!(res->flags & IORESOURCE_MEM)) {
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (!(res->flags & IORESOURCE_BUSY)) {
> > + p = &res->child;
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (res->start == start && res->end == end) {
> > + /* free the whole entry */
> > + *p = res->sibling;
> > + kfree(res);
>
> This is incomplete. the prev resource's sibling should now point to
> this resource's sibling. The parent's child has to be updated if
> this resource is the first child resource. no?
If this resource is the first child, *p is set to &parent->child. So,
it will update the parents' child.
Thanks!
-Toshi
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>